Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 8 - September 14, 2025

Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 544 - 564]Karuvangadan Mukthar @ Muthu v. The Superintendent and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 544Harrisons Malayalam Limited v State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 545Askaf v. Sub Inspector of Police, Sulthan Bathery and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 546XX v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 547M.C. Kamarudheen v. State of Kerala and connected case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 548Union of India and Ors. v. Fareeda Sukha Rafiq and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 549P.S. Vijayakumaran v. Union of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 550XXX v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 551Pamba Boat Race Club Reg No. 98/90 and Anr. v. Pamba Boat Race Club and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 552M/s Classic Agencies and Ors. v. The Regional Office, India Overseas Bank and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 553Anto Paul Prakash v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 554Prof. Dr. K S Anilkumar v The University of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 555The Regional Director, ESI Corporation and Anr v M/S L & T Tech Park Ltd and Anr, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 556Forum of Akshaya Centre Entrepreneurs and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors. and connected case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 557Prasanth Andrews v. Ayyappan Pillai, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 558Venu Gopalakrishnan and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 559Shawn Anthony and Anr v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 560Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 561Santosh Karwade v. Union of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 562Meghna Devi and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 563Suo Motu v. P.C. Jose and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 564Judgments/ Orders This WeekKerala High Court Grants 10-Day Leave To Life Convict Pursuing LLB Course To Attend InternshipCase Title: Karuvangadan Mukthar @ Muthu v. The Superintendent and Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 544The Kerala High Court on Monday (September 8) granted 10-day leave to a man, convicted and sentenced to life for murder and presently pursuing 3-year LL.B. course, to attend internship scheduled from September 10-16.Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan relied on the judgment in Pattakka Suresh Babu v. State of Kerala and observed:"The Division Bench of this Court in Pattakka Suresh Babu's case (supra) observed that, a prisoner who intends to pursue his studies should be allowed to pursue his studies through online, and for other internal examinations, the prisoner should be granted leave. I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner should be given leave in the light of the observation of the Division Bench in Pattakka Suresh Babu's case (supra)."Wayanad Rehabilitation: Kerala High Court Closes Appeal Against Acquisition Of Nedumbala Estate, Notes Govt Has Spared It 'For Now'Case Title: Harrisons Malayalam Limited v State of Kerala and Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 545Kerala High Court has recently closed a writ appeal filed single judge's order allowing the State government to acquire Nedumbala estate owned by Harrisons Malayalam Limited for rehabilitation of 2024 Wayanad Landslide victims under Disaster Management Act.The division bench comprising Justice A Muhammed Mustaque and Justice Harisankar V Menon was informed that the state government, by an order dated 28.02.2025, had excluded Nedumbala Estate from being acquired for the time being. The government submitted that it will come up with a fresh notice to take over the estate in future, if required.[S.276 CrPC] 'Permitting Filing Of Chief Affidavit Of Material Witness As Evidence In Criminal Case Prejudices Accused': Kerala High CourtCase Title: Askaf v. Sub Inspector of Police, Sulthan Bathery and Anr.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 546The Kerala High Court recently acquitted a person after finding that the trial court accepted chief affidavits of witnesses as evidence against him in violation of Section 276 Cr.P.C.Justice Johnson John observed:"Therefore, if the trial court permits the prosecution to file chief affidavit of a material witness as evidence in a criminal case against the accused, the same will cause serious prejudice to the accused, in as much as the entire contents of the chief affidavit can only be treated as an outcome of the leading questions put to the witness." Person Availing Services Of Sex Worker 'Induces Prostitution', Can Be Prosecuted Under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act: Kerala High CourtCase Title: XX v State of KeralaCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 547The Kerala High Court has held that a person availing the services of a sex worker in a brothel cannot be termed a “customer,” stressing that sex workers are not commodities and should not be reduced to the status of products in commercial transactions.Justice V.G. Arun, in his order, clarified that the very concept of “customer” involves the purchase of goods or services. In contrast, sex workers — many of whom are victims of trafficking or coercion — cannot be equated with products or ordinary service providers, adding that a...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 8 - September 14, 2025

K. Salma Jennath

Tags